Prabhasa Moore, 1878

Proceedings of the Scientific Meetings of the Zoological Society of London 1878: 25–26. Type species: Prabhasa venosa Moore, 1878, by subsequent designation (Hampson 1894). Ilema (Prabhasa): Hampson 1900: 138.

Eilema: Strand 1922: 592 .

Description. Wing shape of the typical Eilema habitus, male has tufted androconial fold along the basal half of costal Vein. Male genitalia: uncus bifid, cucullus and sacculus distally with narrow processes; ValVe Ventral edge conVeX, with a setose fold in its basal half; aedeagus thin, Vesica membranous, short, thin. Female genitalia: ductus bursae weakly sclerotized, dorso-Ventrally flattened, its anterior section membranous; corpus bursae elliptical, membranous, with a large round signum posteriorly.

Remarks. 1. Černý & Pinratana (2009) combined Prabhasa and Zadadra Moore, 1878 species in one genus; this is not correct: uncus is bifid in Prabhasa, but simple and narrow in Zadadra (Fig. 30); Prabhasa has a setose Ventral fold of sacculus (on the figure 24 it is pressed aboVe costa), whereas no fold is Visible in Zadadra species (see: Fang 2000: 240–244; Kirti & Singh 2015: 129–131); howeVer, some other characters, like cucullus and sacculus apices are similar; in any case, these genera are closely related. ReVision of the genus Zadadra will be published later by the authors. Here we treat Prabhasa as a probably monotypic genus. All other taXa preViously included to Prabhasa belong to different genera. 2. Specimens from China treated by authors (Daniel 1954; Fang 2000; DubatoloV & Zolotuhin 2011; DubatoloV et al. 2012) as Prabhasa venosa belong to “ Prabhasa ” costalis Moore, 1878 in fact. It is not congeneric with Prabhasa venosa and belongs to another, yet undescribed genus, which is described below as Chinasa DubatoloV, Volynkin & Kishida, gen. nov. 3. Specimens from Thailand treated by Černý & Pinratana (2009) as Prabhasa venosa belong to the new species described below as Macohasa cernyi DubatoloV, Volynkin & Kishida, sp. nov., which is closely related to Macotasa orientalis (Hampson, 1905) and Macotasa dimorpha (Hampson, 1918) . All three species haVe the male genitalia clearly different from Macotasa Moore, 1878, Prabhasa and Zadadra and belong to the new genus, which is described below as Macohasa DubatoloV, Volynkin & Kishida, gen. nov. 4. Judging the male genitalia structure, Prabhasa plumbeomicans (Hampson, 1894) (illustrated by DubatoloV & Zolotuhin (2011) and Kirti & Singh (2015)), belongs to the genus Zadadra, therefore the new combination is established here: Zadadra plumbeomicans (Hampson, 1894), comb. nov. 5. The male genitalia structure of Prabhasa monastyrskyi DubatoloV, 2012 (see DubatoloV 2012: fig. 5) is more similar to that of Zadadra species, but, howeVer, differs by the robust, bulb-like, strongly setose distal saccular process, and presence of a robust cornutus in Vesica. Here we proVisionally place this species in the genus Zadadra: Zadadra monastyrskyi (DubatoloV, 2012), comb. nov. 6. There are seVeral species described or included in Prabhasa, but their male genitalia are quite different either from Prabhasa or from Zadara, Chinasa and Macohasa . Their generic placement will be more carefully scrutinized later by the authors of the present paper in the forthcoming reVision of the genus Zadadra .